[Numpy-discussion] numpy 1.7.0 release?

[Ralf Gommers]

On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 2:45 AM, Bruce Southey <bsouthey at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Ralf Gommers
> <ralf.gommers at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Ralf Gommers <
> ralf.gommers at googlemail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Charles R Harris
> >> <charlesr.harris at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Ralf,
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Ralf Gommers
> >>> <ralf.gommers at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi all,
> >>>>
> >>>> It's been a little over 6 months since the release of 1.6.0 and the NA
> >>>> debate has quieted down, so I'd like to ask your opinion on the
> timing of
> >>>> 1.7.0. It looks to me like we have a healthy amount of bug fixes and
> small
> >>>> improvements, plus three larger chucks of work:
> >>>>
> >>>> - datetime
> >>>> - NA
> >>>> - Bento support
> >>>>
> >>>> My impression is that both datetime and NA are releasable, but should
> be
> >>>> labeled "tech preview" or something similar, because they may still
> see
> >>>> significant changes. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
> >>>>
> >>>> There's still some maintenance work to do and pull requests to merge,
> >>>> but a beta release by Christmas should be feasible. What do you all
> think?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I'm now thinking that is too optimistic. There are a fair number of
> >>> tickets that need to be looked at, including some for einsum and the
> >>> iterator, and I think the number of pull requests needs to be reduced.
> How
> >>> about sometime in the beginning of January?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes, it certainly was. Besides the tickets and pull requests, we also
> need
> >> the support for MinGW 4.x that David is looking at. If that goes
> smoothly
> >> then the first week of January may be feasible, otherwise it'll have to
> be
> >> February (I'm traveling for most of Jan). Or someone else has to
> volunteer
> >> to be the release manager for this release.
> >
> >
> > There isn't really much progress here. Besides a few smaller issues that
> > still need attention, I think the MinGW 4.x issue is a blocker and needs
> to
> > be resolved. This can be done either by making it work, or deciding to
> stick
> > with 3.x. In the latter case numpy.datetime should be fixed somehow.
> >
> > For the next three weeks I'm traveling and won't be able to do any work
> on
> > numpy. I propose to keep master in a state that's (close to being)
> > releasable until the blocker issue is resolved and we can create a 1.7.x
> > branch.
> >
> > Ralf
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> > NumPy-Discussion at scipy.org
> > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> >
>
> I think that my ticket 1973
> (http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/1973) "Can not display a
> masked array containing np.NA values even if masked" that is due to
> the astype function not handling the NA object is also a blocker.
>
> I've set it to Milestone 1.7.0. This should be done for all tickets that
are important for this release, so we can keep track of it.

Ralf
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20120107/dee3cff3/attachment.html>